Sure it is - it assumes a fixed ratio of mouth alcohol:blood alcohol, doesn't compensate for things like bread in your teeth (which hold alcohol) or people like diabetics, who can register.03 stone cold sober. It's not all that good.
It's pretty funny, actually. All this witch-hunting, when all you really need is to stick a few cops at the local bars right after last call.
All the MADD BS distracts from the actual dangerous drunks - you know, the ones with multiple DUIs for.15 and no license. Toss them in jail and be done with it.
Personally, I always walk to the bar, because I know full well I'm going to be utterly illegal to drive when I walk out.
So they can pop you for drunk in public, whee. Cops are out of control - going after safe targets that make money and ignoring the dangerous stuff that actually needs attention.
Makes me wonder why we don't just...you know....do them?
Because that's not the idea. The idea is to make it impossible to drink at all.
Actually, it's probably fine..08 (the limit most places) is only a minor impairment - you have to get to.12 before you're seriously impaired. Fact is, drinking and then driving is just fine, done properly. 1 or 2 beers or glasses of wine won't make you loopy, so no big deal.
You know, we don't actually want a free market - no patents, copyrights or trademarks mean that anyone could duplicate your new invention/screenplay without owing you anything. They could even use your good name (can't trademark that). It's a mess, and eally, the free market only exists as an abstraction.
Suddenly they go from attempting to prevent theft to "just for fun", and you get to make them sound like assholes for having the gall when you walk out the door with boxes of merchandise and they want to see a receipt to verify said merchandise is paid for.
Yeah, basically. You can't hold someone illegally (and without proof, that's what it is) without proof of wrongdoing, because you aren't a cop. Since you have no proof that something was stolen, it's down to doing it for shits and giggles.
"for fun", indeed. A nice debater you'd make.
Your sentence structure makes grammar teachers cry.
Only if you have proof of a crime being committed. You don't get to just hold me for fun, and if you do, I can sue you and win for a lot more than any potential loss. It's not as though these things ever catch shoplifters.
Oh, okay, looks like you're not one of the Saddam/AlQueda crowd. The guys in Iraq now aren't all terrorists. Some are, sure, but yeah, a lot of the people in there now are resistance fighters.
What the hell do terrorists have to do with the Iraq war? Saddam had nothing to do with the crowd we're fighting. And if you're going to harp in 3000 dead US soldiers, don't forget the 100k dead Iraqi civilians - they had no dog in this fight.
Ok, so what's the big deal with Kerberos? MS implements some extensions, which are allowed by the spec, and they implement as much of the spec as anyone else.
Simple: Navy Seals have less training in hand to hand stuff. Also, note that it's very rare for someone to overpower a Navy Seal, so sacrificing some finer points of the style may be justified to reduce the training time. Of course, nothing prevents them from getting trained independently.
And you'd be wrong about techniques. Sure, describing what something is supposed to feel like is a good start, but it takes someone who knows to tell you why your technique is failing on one guy and working on another.
No, a CEO's job is to set the strategic direction and maximize profits over the long term. That's more complicatewd than doing whatever makes the most money right now.
Every single company I interview with doesn't care what my aptitude is, or what I can do to help the business use technology to give them a great ROI on technology while solving their problems.
Amazon cares. Sure, we want people to know java and c++, but we hire for basic smarts and aptitude, because we've internalized that today's hot! new! thing! is tomorrows awful legacy product. Projects are approved based on ROI to the company, so being able to tell your potential boss how you saved your last gig $500k/yr with a month's work (even if you're bitter that they tossed it for a vendor's thing) is valuable. Of course, you also get the occasional egregious hack, but they're often the result of necessity and not idiocy.
Slashdot Mirror
Sure it is - it assumes a fixed ratio of mouth alcohol:blood alcohol, doesn't compensate for things like bread in your teeth (which hold alcohol) or people like diabetics, who can register .03 stone cold sober. It's not all that good.
It's pretty funny, actually. All this witch-hunting, when all you really need is to stick a few cops at the local bars right after last call.
All the MADD BS distracts from the actual dangerous drunks - you know, the ones with multiple DUIs for .15 and no license. Toss them in jail and be done with it.
Personally, I always walk to the bar, because I know full well I'm going to be utterly illegal to drive when I walk out.
So they can pop you for drunk in public, whee. Cops are out of control - going after safe targets that make money and ignoring the dangerous stuff that actually needs attention.
Makes me wonder why we don't just...you know....do them?
Because that's not the idea. The idea is to make it impossible to drink at all.
Actually, it's probably fine. .08 (the limit most places) is only a minor impairment - you have to get to .12 before you're seriously impaired. Fact is, drinking and then driving is just fine, done properly. 1 or 2 beers or glasses of wine won't make you loopy, so no big deal.
What about the objections to no sanity checks and many unfounded assumptions made by the code?
You know, we don't actually want a free market - no patents, copyrights or trademarks mean that anyone could duplicate your new invention/screenplay without owing you anything. They could even use your good name (can't trademark that). It's a mess, and eally, the free market only exists as an abstraction.
Hey, that's better than the fed :)
Suddenly they go from attempting to prevent theft to "just for fun", and you get to make them sound like assholes for having the gall when you walk out the door with boxes of merchandise and they want to see a receipt to verify said merchandise is paid for.
Yeah, basically. You can't hold someone illegally (and without proof, that's what it is) without proof of wrongdoing, because you aren't a cop. Since you have no proof that something was stolen, it's down to doing it for shits and giggles.
"for fun", indeed. A nice debater you'd make.
Your sentence structure makes grammar teachers cry.
That won't stop employee theft, which is way bigger than shoplifting as far as shrinkage goes.
The cop does have a right to ask for ID.
So what? The cop can't demand ID in this situation - all he can do is demand that you identify yourself.
Only if you have proof of a crime being committed. You don't get to just hold me for fun, and if you do, I can sue you and win for a lot more than any potential loss. It's not as though these things ever catch shoplifters.
It's easier to fight problems like this when they're small.
Doesn't that generally require that they call the cops? In this case, the store didn't call the cops, so you have to wonder what they had in mind.
You can say all those things, but if I refuse to play ball, all you can do is kick me out.
They didn't call the cops, so that's out. Generally, if you're planning to detain someone until the cops show up, you should, um, call the cops.
Oh, okay, looks like you're not one of the Saddam/AlQueda crowd. The guys in Iraq now aren't all terrorists. Some are, sure, but yeah, a lot of the people in there now are resistance fighters.
What the hell do terrorists have to do with the Iraq war? Saddam had nothing to do with the crowd we're fighting. And if you're going to harp in 3000 dead US soldiers, don't forget the 100k dead Iraqi civilians - they had no dog in this fight.
because noone cared to offer it?
Ok, so what's the big deal with Kerberos? MS implements some extensions, which are allowed by the spec, and they implement as much of the spec as anyone else.
Yeah, sounds exactly like a guy whose judgment I would trust.
Sounds like a guy tired of living in england.
Simple: Navy Seals have less training in hand to hand stuff. Also, note that it's very rare for someone to overpower a Navy Seal, so sacrificing some finer points of the style may be justified to reduce the training time. Of course, nothing prevents them from getting trained independently.
And you'd be wrong about techniques. Sure, describing what something is supposed to feel like is a good start, but it takes someone who knows to tell you why your technique is failing on one guy and working on another.
I'm thinking Jack thompson or John Grubor.
Isn't that where this lunacy leads to?
No, a CEO's job is to set the strategic direction and maximize profits over the long term. That's more complicatewd than doing whatever makes the most money right now.
Every single company I interview with doesn't care what my aptitude is, or what I can do to help the business use technology to give them a great ROI on technology while solving their problems.
Amazon cares. Sure, we want people to know java and c++, but we hire for basic smarts and aptitude, because we've internalized that today's hot! new! thing! is tomorrows awful legacy product. Projects are approved based on ROI to the company, so being able to tell your potential boss how you saved your last gig $500k/yr with a month's work (even if you're bitter that they tossed it for a vendor's thing) is valuable. Of course, you also get the occasional egregious hack, but they're often the result of necessity and not idiocy.